I, Mr Keeper have read the rule book called PoFA 2012. It says: Mr Operator must send a letter to Mr Keeper to arrive within 14 days and he must put in special warning words. The visit was 4 June 2025. The letter to Mr Keeper was posted on 24 July 2025. That is too late. The letter also leaves out the special warning words. Mr Driver has not been identified. When the rules are not followed and Mr Driver isn’t named, the Mr Keeper doesn’t have to pay. Please cancel the charge.
This is my response to the operators evidence.
In order for the creditor (the operator) to be able to hold the Keeper liable for the charge, PoFA ¶9(5) requires that the NtK be given (served/delivered) within the "relevant period". For clarity, the relevant period is 14 days from the date of the alleged contravention, which was Wednesday 4th June 2025.
For the NtK to have been given within the relevant period, it would have had to have been posted first class no later than Monday 16th June in order for it to have been deemed delivered (given) within 14 days of the date of the alleged contravention. The NtK was not actually issued until Thursday 24th July, which means that it was not given until Monday 28th July, 33 days after the date of the alleged contravention.
As the NtK was not given within the relevant period, it does not comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA. Partial, or even substantial compliance is not enough. Just as someone cannot be partially pregnant, an NtK cannot be partially PoFA compliant. It is a binary issue. The statute is explicit. Unless ALL the requirements have been met, then the creditor cannot rely on PoFA to hold the Keeper liable.
The Keeper is not under any legal obligation to identified the driver. The operator has not identified the driver and, as there can be no presumption or inference that the Keeper must have been the driver, the burden of proof that the Keeper is liable for the charge has not been met. Irrespective of whatever the operator has provided as their "evidence", the first thing that the assessor must establish is whether the Keeper can be liable for the charge. In this case, it is not possible.
The operator has not proven that the person they are pursuing is liable for the charge and therefore the PCN must be cancelled and this appeal upheld.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;DQuoteMr Keeper reads the rule book. It says: send a keeper letter within 14 days and put in special keeper-warning words. The visit was 4 June 2025. The Notice to Keeper was issued 24 July 2025. That is too late. The letter also leaves out the special keeper-warning words. The driver has not been identified. When the rules are not followed and the driver isn’t named, the keeper doesn’t have to pay. Please cancel the charge.
I'd probably go for the first of the two ;D
I am the Keeper. ParkingEye has not established Keeper liability under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) Schedule 4. The alleged contravention was on 4 June 2025. The Notice to Keeper (NtK) was issued on 24 July 2025, outside the 14-day relevant period required by paragraph 9(4)–(6). The NtK also omits the paragraph 9(2)(f) keeper-liability warning, indicating the operator is not relying on PoFA. The driver has not been identified. With PoFA not met and no identified driver, the keeper cannot be liable and this appeal must be allowed.
Mr Keeper reads the rule book. It says: send a keeper letter within 14 days and put in special keeper-warning words. The visit was 4 June 2025. The Notice to Keeper was issued 24 July 2025. That is too late. The letter also leaves out the special keeper-warning words. The driver has not been identified. When the rules are not followed and the driver isn’t named, the keeper doesn’t have to pay. Please cancel the charge.
As you are the registered keeper, and this is PE's first correspondence, you would appeal to have a rare 'golden ticket'. You can appeal along the lines of the below:Dear Sirs,
I have received your Parking Charge Notice (Ref: ________) for vehicle registration mark ____ ___, in which you allege that the driver has incurred a parking charge. I note from your correspondence that you are not seeking to hold me liable as the registered keeper, under Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 ("The Act"). You have chosen not to issue a Notice to Keeper in accordance with The Act, and it is now too late for you to do so.
There is no obligation for me to name the driver and I will not be doing so. I am therefore unable to help you further with this matter, and look forward to your confirmation that the charge has been cancelled. If you choose to decline this appeal, you must issue a POPLA code.
Yours,
If appealing online, be careful there are no drop down/tick boxes that cause you to identify who was driving, and keep a close eye on your spam folder for their response. If they do not respond within 28 days, chase them.